1 2026:CGHC:26359 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5361 of 2022 • Alok @ Pappu Dewangan S/o Ram Kumar Dewangan Aged About 58 Years R/o 48/848 Ward No. 38, Brahman Para, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Municipal Corporation Raipur Through Municipal Commissioner Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Zone Commissioner Zone 6, Municipal Corporation Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4. Collector Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5. Tehsildar Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 6. S.D.O. Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Aditya Bhardwaj, Advocate. For State/Respondents No.1, 4 to 6 : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, P.L. For Respondents No.2 & 3 : Ms. A. Sandhya Rao, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 29/06/2026 1. Heard. 2. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 To kindly call for the records of the case from the respondents. DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 10.2 To kindly direct the respondent Municipal Corporation Raipur to not to demolish/remove the shop/structure of the petitioner. 10.3 To kindly restrain the respondents from illegal demolition of the shop. 10.4 To kindly make any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including awarding of the costs of the peition. ” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the reply filed by the Municipal Corporation, Raipur (C.G.), wherein they have categorically stated in paragraphs No.4 & 5 that so far as the demolition of shop of the petitioner is concerned and no action for such demolition has been undertaken by the answering respondents and at present there is no proposal for widening of the road. 4. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, this petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner that in case any exigency arises, he may rush to this Court in accordance with law. 5. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. 6. Interlocutory application(s), pending if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Deepti Jha